This is quite timely, given this week’s debate on school financing.  Due to a combined projection of lower enrollment and increased tax revenue, California schools expect to get an extra $6 billion over the next five years.  Of course, various groups are lining up for a piece of the pie, "promoting ideas like improving high schools, paying teachers more, and helping urban districts with severely declining enrollment" (full story here).  The Orange County Register is a bit perturbed at all this:

We’re not sure how paying teachers more across the board will fix the state’s broken school system, but as the article said, "interest groups are already lining up to get their share." Notice also how the article pointed to demands for more money for districts with declining enrollments. Silly us, we thought that districts with increasing enrollment ought to get more money, not those that serve fewer and fewer students each year.

This helps illustrate a rather large disconnect between the California education system and the reality in which schools operate.  Presumably, if an organization or department has less work, it needs less resources to do the job.  Not so in the Golden State, where schools will get more money to do less work.  But some schools will have increasing enrollment, which is why interest groups want schools with decreasing enrollments to get more money. 

The Register asks if, in light of this extra funding, we can expect the state to institute some meaningful reform.  Given this comment, I’m skeptical:

"The emphasis on reform and change should be significant," said Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland. "We don’t want to use all this money to maintain the status quo. But it is hard because everyone has a vested interest."

In a refreshing move for a newspaper, the Register calls for greater educational choice in the form of public charter schools and vouchers; as you might imagine, I agree that parents should have a say.  But let’s set aside school choice for a second.  I have two questions for establishment types, particularly the unions.

1. Of paramount importance to the education system is increased funding.  Based on this article, this year California is spending $41 billion (44 percent of the state’s general fund) to educate 6 million students.  Since that is presumably insufficient, how much money would it take?  Give me a specific dollar amount. 
2. If you had that sum to work with, would it be fair–equitable–to expect every kid in the state to receive an adequate education?  I’m not asking for a first-rate, excellent education, but one every kid can be expected to graduate from high school with a C average.  If not, why not? 

The comment thread is open. 

I may be a bit late to the party (Eduwonk, Alexander Russo and Whitney Tilson have all weighed in), but I just took the time to look it over. 

Initially I felt Tough provided a good primer, but only a primer, for somebody unfamiliar with the ed reform debate as it relates to the achievement gap/NCLB.  (See the comment in Russo’s thread.)  Tough really does little more than merely scratch the surface.  In summary, he says, "Low-income kids need help catching up, NCLB won’t get the job done, but public charters like KIPP show it’s possible!"  But remember that this appeared in the New York Times.  The fact that the paper of record is talking about issues that have been bouncing around ed reform for years now–and trying to connecting the dots between closing the achievement gap and accountability/charters–could mean that the debate may finally be moving to a broader audience. 

Speaking of KIPP, one passage I found a bit humorous:

The leaders of this informal network [of public charter schools in New York] are now wrestling with an unintended consequence of their schools’ positive results and high profiles: their incoming students are sometimes too good. At some schools, students arrive scoring better than typical children in their neighborhoods, presumably because the school’s reputation is attracting more-engaged parents with better-prepared kids to its admission lottery. Even though almost every student at the KIPP Academy in the Bronx, for example, is from a low-income family, and all but a few are either black or Hispanic, and most enter below grade level, they are still a step above other kids in the neighborhood; on their math tests in the fourth grade (the year before they arrived at KIPP), KIPP students in the Bronx scored well above the average for the district, and on their fourth-grade reading tests they often scored above the average for the entire city. 

I don’t question that this influx of students puts public charters like KIPP in a rather uncomfortable situation.  But while it may be an unintended consequence of achievement, it’s a natural consequence all the same–after all, they’re called "schools of choice" for a reason. 

I do agree with Tilson on the article’s disregard for the political boundaries of closing the achievement gap.  Tough points out that schools like KIPP demonstrate that low-income kids can make it academically, and lists what it takes to make that happen: longer school days, more time in class, weekend work, etc.  (Read our interview with KIPP Philadelphia principal Marc Mannella, who openly says, "What KIPP does isn’t terribly complicated, but it’s hard.")  But he doesn’t acknowledge the level of persuasion it would take to get the unions to accept such a work load.  And while higher pay for teachers is definitely a factor (as union blog Edwize confirms), there’s quite a bit more to the equation.  It would require autonomy on the part of principals to make personnel decisions, institute some form of merit pay, no more dancing lemons.  In short, the unions would have to get out of the way and let principals run their schools, a feat requiring a level of political muscle not present in either party at the moment. 

I’d also point out that one of the components of these successful schools (and a constant complaint from establishment types) is parental involvement, which is a built-in facet of choice schools.  As Mannella points out, everybody involved–student, teacher and parent–signs an agreement promising to do whatever it takes to achieve success.  If the parent doesn’t like it, the parent is quite free to take his or her child elsewhere.  Such an agreement just wouldn’t carry the same clout in a traditional public school. 

It’s true that Tough says very little that ed reform veterans haven’t already heard.  But then, he wasn’t writing to the ed reform crowd anyway. 

I may be a bit late to the party (Eduwonk, Alexander Russo and Whitney Tilson have all weighed in), but I just took the time to look it over. 

Initially I felt Tough provided a good primer, but only a primer, for somebody unfamiliar with the ed reform debate as it relates to the achievement gap/NCLB.  (See the comment in Russo’s thread.)  Tough really does little more than merely scratch the surface.  In summary, he says, "Low-income kids need help catching up, NCLB won’t get the job done, but public charters like KIPP show it’s possible!"  But remember that this appeared in the New York Times.  The fact that the paper of record is talking about issues that have been bouncing around ed reform for years now–and trying to connecting the dots between closing the achievement gap and accountability/charters–could mean that the debate may finally be moving to a broader audience. 

Speaking of KIPP, one passage I found a bit humorous:

The leaders of this informal network [of public charter schools in New York] are now wrestling with an unintended consequence of their schools’ positive results and high profiles: their incoming students are sometimes too good. At some schools, students arrive scoring better than typical children in their neighborhoods, presumably because the school’s reputation is attracting more-engaged parents with better-prepared kids to its admission lottery. Even though almost every student at the KIPP Academy in the Bronx, for example, is from a low-income family, and all but a few are either black or Hispanic, and most enter below grade level, they are still a step above other kids in the neighborhood; on their math tests in the fourth grade (the year before they arrived at KIPP), KIPP students in the Bronx scored well above the average for the district, and on their fourth-grade reading tests they often scored above the average for the entire city. 

I don’t question that this influx of students puts public charters like KIPP in a rather uncomfortable situation.  But while it may be an unintended consequence of achievement, it’s a natural consequence all the same–after all, they’re called "schools of choice" for a reason. 

I do agree with Tilson on the article’s disregard for the political boundaries of closing the achievement gap.  Tough points out that schools like KIPP demonstrate that low-income kids can make it academically, and lists what it takes to make that happen: longer school days, more time in class, weekend work, etc.  (Read our interview with KIPP Philadelphia principal Marc Mannella, who openly says, "What KIPP does isn’t terribly complicated, but it’s hard.")  But he doesn’t acknowledge the level of persuasion it would take to get the unions to accept such a work load.  And while higher pay for teachers is definitely a factor (as union blog Edwize confirms), there’s quite a bit more to the equation.  It would require autonomy on the part of principals to make personnel decisions, institute some form of merit pay, no more dancing lemons.  In short, the unions would have to get out of the way and let principals run their schools, a feat requiring a level of political muscle not present in either party at the moment. 

I’d also point out that one of the components of these successful schools (and a constant complaint from establishment types) is parental involvement, which is a built-in facet of choice schools.  As Mannella points out, everybody involved–student, teacher and parent–signs an agreement promising to do whatever it takes to achieve success.  If the parent doesn’t like it, the parent is quite free to take his or her child elsewhere.  Such an agreement just wouldn’t carry the same clout in a traditional public school. 

It’s true that Tough says very little that ed reform veterans haven’t already heard.  But then, he wasn’t writing to the ed reform crowd anyway. 

Class Warfare - Opinion: Implying there are now enough charter schools, the AFT says the district’s charters already offer "a tremendous amount of choice for the citizens of Philadelphia." What about the 20,000 students on waiting lists?

Longer days, Saturday sessions considered for LA schools - More students in the Los Angeles Unified School District may end up with longer school days and have to go to class on Saturdays, new Superintendent David L. Brewer III said Wednesday after a meeting with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

City Leaders Take Debate to Florida - D.C. Mayor-elect Adrian M. Fenty and incoming council Chairman Vincent C. Gray are paying separate visits to Florida this week for meetings with Miami-Dade County school Superintendent Rudolph F. Crew, a key adviser in Fenty’s campaign to win control of the District’s struggling public education system.

Choice not purpose of magnets says school board - The Stamford, Connecticut school board concluded a lengthy debate about whether school choice is one of the chief purposes of the city’s five magnet schools Tuesday, dropping choice from the list of top priorities of the city’s magnets.

Robbing Peter to Pay Paul - Opinion: Fordham’s Fund the Child proposal may well undermine many of the efforts that currently are advancing public education in states across the country.\

Charter School Start-ups Face Tough Financial Realities - Those looking to start new charter schools in Baltimore came face to face with the cold realities of numbers and money that come with trying to get a charter school off the ground.

Vermont NEA Joins NCLB Lawsuit - School districts in Vermont have joined forces with three other states and the nation’s largest teachers union to ask a federal appeals court to revive a lawsuit against the federal government and its NCLB law.

New system includes fraud report hotline - Employees of the San Diego school district have a place to turn to if they have a tip about fraud or need advice to avoid ethical pitfalls.

Falling Behind Because of No Child Left Behind - Hawaii teachers share their perspectives on NCLB.

The Ins And Outs of No Child Left Behind - In the four years since it took effect in 2002, the "No Child Left Behind Law" has had a sweeping impact on public school classrooms across the country.

Philanthropist gives $10.5 million to charter school group - Billionaire philanthropist Eli Broad has donated more than $10 million to a leading charter school organization that will help its bid to triple in size as it continues to establish itself as an alternative to traditional public schools.

Teachers to push for full-day kindergarten - A $20,000 NEA grant to the Indiana State Teachers Association will go toward a push for full-day kindergarten.

Every minute counts - Extending the school day is a strategy more schools are trying as they respond to pressure from state and federal law to increase student performance in the subjects that form the building blocks of learning.

Support staff — without support - In the United States, 70 percent of education support staff work full time, but nearly seven of 10 earn less than $25,000 a year, according to the National Education Association.

Teachers’ unions call for higher pay in poorest schools - Two of Massachusetts’s largest teachers’ unions are banding together to urge for higher pay for teachers who work in schools in poor communities.

L.A. mayor, new schools chief on the same page - Despite an ongoing feud between city and school district leaders, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and new Los Angeles Unified School District Supt. David L. Brewer pledged jointly Wednesday to demand more funding for schools and more accountability from the district.

Extra pay urged at poorest schools - Massachusetts’s teachers’ unions are calling for extra pay for teachers in high-poverty schools, marking the first time that the unions have banded together behind a new type of teacher pay.

Achievement issue comes down to money - The crowd crammed into the auditorium at the downtown Seattle Public Library was friendly, but the questions were tough.\

Coaching + Math = Success - Editorial: The Massachusetts Board of Education wants to get more students to score at the proficient and advanced levels on the MCAS tests. To do that, the Legislature and the board need to deal with the alarming weakness in mathematics scores in the later elementary grades.

UPDATE:

Charter schools struggle with class size - A fraction of Miami-Dade’s 350 public schools are not meeting the requirements of the state’s class-size amendment, according to a report released Wednesday by the Florida Department of Education.

The Holy Grail of public education has always been to close the minority/white educational achievement gap.  For a while, that seemed to be happening; especially after the civil rights reforms of the 1960s, black Americans’ standardized test scores improved significantly compared with those of whites.  However, between 1988 and 1994, black reading scores fell dramatically, a decline that mirrored the greatest deterioration in the quality of America’s public schools, and since that time those scores have remained flat-line.

More “Closing In On Closing the Black/White Educational Achievement Gap (Alan Bonsteel)”